Professional Documents
Culture Documents
P&I Risk Awareness Collision
P&I Risk Awareness Collision
P&I Risk Awareness Collision
COLLISION CLAIMS
An aid to risk identification and loss reduction
DEFINITIONS
In this checklist, colour is used to denote the various
elements in the risk awareness process
Threat
Something that if not controlled could cause a
P&I incident
Consequence
The monetary cost to the Club/Member
Control
Something which reduces the possibility of a ‘Threat’
causing an incident
Thomas Miller P&I Limited asserts its right under the Copyright, Designs
and Patents Act 1988 to be identified as the author of this work.
2
USING THIS CHECKLIST /
SCORING
This booklet is a guide to the Controls and key
points that the UK Club’s Risk Assessors look
for when inspecting a vessel.
3
Collision
4
How do the watch keeping systems interact with port arrival/
departure requirements?
5
Followed in collision avoidance – including, but not limited to:
- Following ColRegs requirements for communications via
whistle (daytime)
- Signal light (night) if other vessel perceived not to be taking
sufficient action to avoid collision
- Rule 7 – Risk of collision – Use all available means to
determine risk of collision
- Rule 8 – Action to avoid collision – Positive, made in ample
time and due regard to good seamanship
See also:
- Rule 16 – Action by give-way vessel
- Rule 17 – Action by stand-on vessel
- Rule 18 – Responsibilities between vessels
6
Standing and night orders issued
Follow standing and night orders
Call the master when required
OOW familiar with ship’s limitations
Stopping distances
Turning circles
Manoeuvring characteristics
Is restricted visibility defined in nautical miles?
SCORE
COMMENTS
7
THREAT: NAVIGATION
UNDER PILOTAGE
CONTROLS:
Bridge team and resources management
understood/followed?
Bridge team management (BTM) procedures understood,
training undertaken?
Bridge resource management (BRM) procedures understood
and training undertaken?
Techniques practised in clear weather and in open sea?
Applied in all circumstances on board?
8
SOLAS V, Reg 34
IMO Res A893
STCW pp 150 A/VIII
Evidence of pilot/master interchange?
Due consideration for bank effect in channels and rivers
9
How do the watch keeping systems interact with port arrival/
departure requirements?
Competency of pilot
Procedures in place to ensure qualified, experienced pilots
employed?
Procedures in place to deal with pilot under performance?
Procedures in place to deal with pilot not fit for duty?
OOW familiar with STCW pp159 – Navigation with a pilot
on board
10
SCORE
Recording positions
Competency of pilot
COMMENTS
11
THREAT: ADVERSE WEATHER
CONTROLS:
OOW familiar with forecasting and how to
‘read’ weather maps
Training in meteorological reports and ‘reading’ weather
12
Stopping distances
Turning circles
Manoeuvring characteristics
Is restricted visibility defined in nautical miles?
SCORE
COMMENTS
13
THREAT: REDUCED VISIBILITY
CONTROLS:
Bridge procedures
Increased bridge manning requirements and watch keeping
Equipment operation
Passage planning
Engine readiness
Safe speed
14
Followed in collision avoidance – including, but not limited to:
- Following ColRegs requirements for communications via
whistle (daytime)
Signal light (night) if other vessel perceived not to be taking
sufficient action to avoid collision (Aldis lamp rigged)
- Rule 7 – Risk of collision – Use all available means to
determine risk of collision
- Rule 8 – Action to avoid collision – Positive, made in ample
time and due regard to good seamanship
See also
- Rule 16 – Action by give-way vessel
- Rule 17 – Action by stand-on vessel
- Rule 18 – Responsibilities between vessels
15
SCORE
Bridge procedures
COMMENTS
16
THREAT: ANCHOR FAILURE
CONTROLS:
Inspection and planned maintenance/greasing
Anchor windlasses are regarded as ‘critical equipment’ under
the ISM code
Planned maintenance procedures set up and followed?
Brakes
Gypsy
Joining shackles/swivels
Worn chain and missing studs
Lashings/compressor bar
Records maintained of tests and overhauls
Anchor windlasses are ‘critical equipment’
Greasing should be conducted by a responsible petty officer
17
SCORE
COMMENTS
18
THREAT: LOSS OF PROPULSION
CONTROLS:
Inspection and planned maintenance
Machinery and equipment in all areas is logged into an
inspection and PMS on board?
Either a written (running hours) or computerised system is OK
Must be adequate for the task (ISM Code requirement)
Machinery manuals up-to-date?
Manuals in a language understood by all the engineers?
Regular inspections of all equipment, tools and machinery?
Regular maintenance performed?
Toolbox talks conducted before the job?
Equipment in poor condition is removed from service?
Replaced as soon as possible for safety?
All personnel are instructed to inspect all equipment prior to use
Replace any worn or dangerous seeming tools
PPE, other equipment available prior to commencing
operations?
Alarm systems
Alarms regularly tested
No alarms by-passed or jumped
No alarm ignored and no alarm PCB by-passed because of
frequency
19
Bridge OOW familiar with passage plan abort
procedures?
Close communications between OOW engine room and bridge
Passage planning must be detailed
No-go areas clearly marked?
Abort procedures clearly understood?
Emergency anchorage locations marked?
SCORE
Alarm systems
Anchors prepared
COMMENTS
20
THREAT: LOSS OF STEERING
CONTROLS:
Inspection and planned maintenance
Planned maintenance system (PMS) in place?
Inspections carried out at regular intervals each watch?
See also SOLAS V Regulation 25 and 26
Alarm systems
Alarms regularly tested?
No alarms by-passed or jumped?
No alarm ignored and no alarm PCB by-passed because of
frequency?
21
Anchors prepared in narrow channels and
under pilotage
Standing procedure in place to have anchors prepared for
emergency use
Stand-by PO or senior rating forward (if required)
SCORE
Alarm systems
Anchors prepared
COMMENTS
22
THREAT: COMMUNICATION
CONTROLS:
ER/Bridge
Mooring stations/Bridge
Ship-Shore/Tugs
Pilot/Bridge team
Pilot/Master interchange and records
SCORE
Threat: Communication
ER/Bridge
Mooring stations/Bridge
Ship-shore/Tugs
Pilot/Bridge team
COMMENTS
23
Consequences
CONTROLS:
Damage mitigation procedures
What procedures are in place to help reduce the effects of a
collision incident, and how effective are they?
All mitigation measures are logged?
Alarm/stop procedures
Communications procedure in place for all incidents?
General and fire alarms are functioning correctly?
Verbal alarm raising system is defined and can be shown to be
adequate?
Emergency drills/training
Are drills/training procedures in place to cope with high
risk incidents?
Fire drills?
Lifeboat and abandon ship drills?
MOB rescue drills to include Williamson Turn and deployment
of all equipment?
Anti pollution drills?
Emergency steering drills?
Medical emergency drills and rescues for various areas of
the vessel?
Pollution drills – bunker leak, cargo leak, grounding,
collision, etc?
Watertight integrity drills – watertight doors, bulkhead
valves, etc?
Ballasting procedures in the event of a hull breach?
Emergency reporting/communication
procedures
Are there reporting procedures in place and understood if an
incident occurs?
Reporting to owner, charterer, P&I correspondent?
Categorisation of incident?
Timing of incident?
Communication requirements?
Who was informed on board / on shore?
- When?
- How?
- Why?
- What did they do?
Records of communications (ship management, third parties,
national authorities, P&I, etc)?
Letters of protest:
- Are there procedures in place for issuing letters of protest?
- Are the reasons for issuing letters of protest understood?
- For all incidents, LOP should be issued and, where possible,
notorised, signed for receipt, etc
- Copies retained on file on board and entered in the evidence
log for use in defending the claim should it arise?
26
General advice:
- Club correspondent
Stability advice:
- Collision – classification society
Pollution:
- Authorities
- Harbour master
27
SCORE
Consequences
Alarm/stop procedures
Emergency drills/training
COMMENTS
28
METHODOLOGY
Following the well-known definition:
RISK = FREQUENCY x CONSEQUENCE
the Club has analysed the number and value of the Club’s claims to
prioritise high risk areas and determine what the THREATS are that
cause these claims. Then, with the aid of those at the sharp end – our
correspondents, surveyors, claims executives and underwriters and
last but not least important, our crews – we have sought to determine
what CONTROLS – be it engineered, procedural or managerial –
have mitigated such claims, or would have done so if they had been
in place. Those threats and controls can then be targeted for
assessment, either with the help of the Club’s own risk assessors,
or by Members themselves in conjunction with their crews.